linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] pinctrl: Add support for additional dynamic states

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20130729090822.GZ7656@atomide.com>
Date:	Mon, 29 Jul 2013 02:08:22 -0700
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc:	Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
	linus.walleij@...aro.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] pinctrl: Add support for additional dynamic states

* Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org> [130719 12:10]:
> On 07/19/2013 04:29 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> > 
> > First of all, I'd like to mention that these patches do *not* connect
> > pinctrl to PM runtime, so until driver will call pinctrl_select_state()
> > or pinctrl_pm_select_*() there will be no pins state changes.
> 
> Isn't the whole point of the pinctrl_pm_select*() APIs to eventually be
> called automatically by the runtime PM core, so that we don't need to
> write code to do this in every single driver, just like we moved the
> call to pinctrl_select_state(default) into the device core so that we
> didn't have to make every device do that manually?

Yes I think we can make it all automatic. So far it seems that the
last missing piece was Linus' suggestion of making it mostly happen
using irqchip with calls to pinctrl so consumer drivers may not need
to do anything.
 
> > (As result, i2c-mux is not good example, seems:))
> 
> As such, I think all situations are good examples, because a generic
> feature has to work in all cases.

Yes we need to support both runtime PM, and more complex cases of
sharing pins between devices for example that are not runtime PM
related.

Regards,

Tony
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/